PROBLEMS OF THAI AIRWAYS SENIOR CABIN

CREW TOWARD ENGLISH LANGUAGE

COMMUNICATION WITH GUESTS IN ROYAL FIRST

CLASS AND NEW BUSINESS CLASS ON

INTERNATIONAL FLIGHTS

BY

MISS NARUECHON PUPPHAVESA

AN INDEPENDENT STUDY PAPER SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL

FULFILLMENT OF

THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF ARTS IN CAREER ENGLISH FOR

INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION

LANGUAGE INSTITUTE

THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY

ACADEMIC YEAR 2017

COPYRIGHT OF THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

PROBLEMS OF THAI AIRWAYS SENIOR CABIN

CREW TOWARD ENGLISH LANGUAGE

COMMUNICATION WITH GUESTS IN ROYAL FIRST

CLASS AND NEW BUSINESS CLASS ON

INTERNATIONAL FLIGHTS

BY

MISS NARUECHON PUPPHAVESA

AN INDEPENDENT STUDY PAPER SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL

FULFILLMENT OF

THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF ARTS IN CAREER ENGLISH FOR

INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION

LANGUAGE INSTITUTE

THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY

ACADEMIC YEAR 2017

COPYRIGHT OF THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY

LANGUAGE INSTITUTE

INDEPENDENT STUDY PAPER

BY

MISS NARUECHON PUPPHA VESA

ENTITLED

PROBLEMS OF THAI AIRWAYS SENIOR CABIN CREW TOWARD

ENGLISH LANGUAGE COMMUNICATION WITH GUESTS IN ROY AL

FIRST CLASS AND NEW BUSINESS CLASS ON INTERNATIONAL

FLIGHTS

was approved as partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the degree of Master of Arts in Career English for International Communication

on May 30, 2018

Chairman � �ci=(Assistant Professor Monnipha Somp\�.D.)

Member and Advisor ��./ __ _

(Assistant Professor Vimolchaya Yanasugondha, Ph.D.)

Dean

sociate Professor Supong Tangkiengsirisin, Ph.D.)

i

Independent Study Paper Title PROBLEMS OF THAI AIRWAYS SENIORS

CABIN CREW TOWARD ENGLISH

LANGUAGE COMMUNICATION WITH

GUESTS IN ROYAL FIRST CLASS AND

NEW BUSINESS CLASS ON

INTERNATIONAL FLIGHTS

Author Miss Naruechon Pupphavesa

Degree Master of Arts

Major Field/Faculty/University Career English for International Communication

Language Institute

Thammasat University

Independent Study Paper Advisor Asst. Prof. Vimolchaya Yanasugondha, Ph.D.

Academic Years 2017

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study is to investigate barriers of English communication in terms

of oral communication skills and the communication strategies used to solve problems

between Thai Airways senior cabin crew and their foreign guests on international flights

in order to gain acquisition of a second language.

Seventy-seven Thai Airways senior cabin crew working in royal first and new

business classes at Thai Airways International Public Company Limited participated in

this study. Using quantitative method, the empirical part of the study consisted of both

closed- and open-ended questions. The data was analyzed by percentage, frequency,

mean and standard deviation.

This study revealed that problems of Thai Airways senior cabin crew toward

English communication with foreign guests in royal first and new business classes on

international flights were in three main areas. Firstly, the two major problems of oral

communication were being able to understand slang, idiomatic expressions, or

colloquialisms and being able to express complex ideas. Secondly, it was found that Thai

Airways senior cabin crew often speak in a warm tone and aim to pay attention to the

interlocutor by using non-verbal language such as eye contact and facial expressions.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

ii

Lastly, the most significant communication strategy used to solve communication

problems when Thai Airways senior cabin crew face problems was always to use

message-reduction strategy, using the words which are familiar to them. In contrast, they

rarely use message-abandonment.

Keywords: problems of English communication, communication strategies

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, I would like to express my deep and highest gratitude to my

advisor, Asst. Prof. Dr. Vimolchaya Yanasugondha. Her friendly guidance and expert

advice have been invaluable assistance throughout my research.

I would like to thank my former Thai Airways air purser, Mr. Tharat

Pawataungsunit. I am grateful for his knowledgeable input regarding cabin crew career

paths and useful suggestions in the earlier stages of this work.

I deeply thank all my professors, and lecturers at LITU: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Supong

Tangkiengsirisin, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Sucharat Rimkeeratikul, Asst. Prof. Dr. Supakorn

Phoocharoensil, Asst. Prof. Dr. Pattama Sappapan, Asst. Prof. Tanom Tiensawangchai,

Ajarn Mark E. Zentz, Dr. Pimsiri Taylor, and Asst. Prof. Dr. Kittitouch Soontornwipast.

They inspired me in every class with fascinating media and support for all my

assignments.

Thank you to Lect. Kate, guest lecturers, and the demonstration teachers at YSJ;

I cannot mention all of you by name. You are great teachers who always work hard, think

creatively, motivated me, and shared in my special moments during my studies at both

LITU and York St. John University.

Also, I am grateful to my host family Mr. Tony and Mrs. Diana Harts who

provided throughout my stay whilst in York, fulfilled my wonderful experience.

I also thank Ajarn Rick, who has proofread and edited my research.

Thank you to all the staff of Thammasat University both CEIC and ELT.

Thank you to my truly sincere friend Nuchy for being generous with me and

“England Go Go !!!!!” group for laughing together.

A special big thank you to my company, Thai Airways, and my Thai Airways

cabin crew friends who have supported me to complete the survey with great help. I am

therefore extremely grateful that they decided to dedicate their time for assisting and

participating in my research. All Thai Airways cabin crew are the world’s best staff in

my heart.

Lastly, I would like to thank my beloved family for all their endless love. For my

loving mother, who raised me with love and care and my loving husband, whose

faithfully supports me spiritually and guides me through the difficult times.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

iv

My efforts and contribution should be rewarded to my families and friends. This

accomplishment would not have been possible without them. I am deeply appreciative.

Miss Naruechon Pupphavesa

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ABSTRACT i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS v

LIST OF TABLES viii

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Background 1

1.1.1 Background of the Research Questions 2

1.2 Research Questions 4

1.3 Objectives of the Study 4

1.4 Significance of the Study 4

1.5 Scope of the Study 5

1.6 Definitions of Abbreviations and Terms 5

1.6.1 Definitions of abbreviations 5

1.6.2 Definitions of terms 6

1.7 Organization of the Study 7

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 8

2.1 Communication 8

2.2 The Concept of Cabin Crew 10

2.2.1 The Definitions of Cabin Crew 10

2.2.2 The Characteristics of Job Descriptions of Cabin Crew 11

2.3 Barriers to Effective Communication 12

2.4 Communication Strategies 13

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

vi

2.4.1 The Definitions of Communication Strategies (CSs) 13

2.4.2 The Taxonomies of Communication Strategies (CSs) 15

2.5 Problems in English Communication 18

2.6 Related Studies 19

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY 25

3.1 Population and Sample 25

3.2 Research Instruments 25

3.3 Data Collection Procedure 27

3.4 Data Analysis 27

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS 29

4.1 Demographic Data of the Participants 29

4.2 Participants’ Communication Barriers 32

4.3 Communication Strategies 36

4.4 Comments and Suggestions 40

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION, DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 42

5.1 Summary of the Study 42

5.1.1 Objectives of the study 42

5.1.2 Participants, instruments, and procedures 42

5.2 Summary of the Findings 43

5.2.1 Demography of the participants 43

5.2.2 Participants’ Communication Problems 43

5.2.3 Participants’ Communication Strategies 44

5.2.4 Participants’ suggestion in the open-ended question 45

5.3 Discussion 45

5.3.1 Participants’ Communication Problem: Listening Skill 45

5.3.2 Participants’ Communication Problem: Speaking Skill 46

5.3.3 Participants’ Communication Strategies 46

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

vii

5.4 Conclusion 47

5.5 Recommendations for Further Study 48

REFERENCES 49

APPENDIX 54

BIOGRAPHY 61

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Tables Page

2.1 Taxonomy of CSs adopted in this study 18

3.1 Interpretation of Rating Results in Communication Barriers 26

3.2 Interpretation of Rating Results in Communication Strategies 27

3.3 Interpretation of A Five-Likert Scale 28

4.1 Gender 29

4.2 Age 30

4.3 Educational Background 30

4.4 Work Experience 31

4.5 Rank Position 31

4.6 Standardized English Proficiency Test 32

4.7 Experience of Unsuccessful Communication Using English with Foreign

Guests 32

4.8 Frequency of Encountering Communication Problems with Guests 33

4.9 Listening and Speaking Problems 33

4.10 The Use of English Communication Strategies 37

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

This chapter introduces (1) the background of the study (2) research questions, (3)

objectives of the study, (4) significance of the study, (5) scope of the study, (6)

definition of abbreviations and terms, and (7) organization of the study.

1.1 Background

Thai Airways International Public Company Limited (TG), as the national flag

carrier, was founded in 1960 and joined Star Alliance in 1997, and is based in Bangkok,

Thailand. TG operates domestic, reginal and intercontinental flights to 37 countries

around the world (www.thaiairways.com). One of Thai Airways International Public

Company Limited’s policies is promoting and representing Thai culture, customs and

tradition. To achieve the company’s vision of being “The First Choice Carrier with

Touches of Thai”, it is important that TG cabin crew acquire new skills and standards

of professionalism in terms of using English language as the medium of

communication, cultural diversity and norms.

Since Thai Airways International Public Company limited (TG) has launched

the new business/first class services operated by TG and Yates partners in 2016 to

achieve the highest productivity service, therefore training courses have been instituted,

class by class, approximately these past 2 years. Also, more courses are expected in

case more crew are required for these particular new services. The content of the new

business class course consists of Mindset, THAI hospitality, service beyond, service

dialogue, problem solving, and cultural diversity. The content includes a workshop

concerning the service mock up performance. To assess the overall performance, at the

end of the course, a post-test is conducted.

The purpose of these courses is to educate TG cabin crew on how the important

‘THAI Key Concepts and Understand’ can affect and help bring back the achievement

as one of the top 5 leading airlines. These courses are fully integrated suites of TG’s

service. The high standard performance carried out by professional TG crew members

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

2

aims to serve valued passengers through the remarkable smooth as silk experience.

“According to a survey of SKYTRAX (the United Kingdom-based organization which

conducts research on the commercial airlines around the world), it is noted that the

ability to communicate by cabin crew is considered to be one of essential factors

leading to the entire successful outcome of an airline” (“Passenger Choice Awards”,

n.d.) (Nanakorn, 2011, p.1). The airline industry is one of the huge business units which

needs the improvement of its employees to interculturally communicate for its

competiveness. Also, the airlines business is related to the aviation service industry.

Furthermore, safety is an important factor. The airline has to maintain communication

in order to ensure and be aware of errors with zero incidents and no complaints to make

the ultimate satisfaction of the passengers. It is remarked clearly by the international

airline auditor institution, SKYTRAX that a cabin crew’s English ability to

communicate with passengers on board is crucial during flights whilst serving on the

ground and also once in the air. SKYTRAX has rated Thai Airways as follows: - 4/5

stars in first class and 4/5 stars in business class, in terms of ‘cabin staff language skills’

(www.airlinequality.com). Hence, it drives Thai Airways to launch a new business

class and royal first class to strengthen cabin crew’s English ability with the best

qualified English competence to reach the target ‘to be number 1’; not just only meal

service improvement, but also increasing the effectiveness of the safety conditions, in

case of emergency. This research study attempts to investigate the cabin crew language

abilities at work during long haul flights of TG senior cabin crew who are working in

new royal first class and new business class. In this research, it is intended to study Thai

Airways cabin crew’s English problems. Consequently, it could be brought into

analysis to conduct and strengthen Thai Airways to meet the purpose and for success

of the company. Furthermore, the conclusion found could possibly lead Thai Airways

to become a professional airline with excellence beyond service as “The First Choice

Carrier with Touches of Thai” slogan indicates in all air travelers’ hearts.

1.1.1 Background of the Research Questions

SKYTRAX World Airline Awards, established in 1989 and based in London,

is an airline industry consulting and rating company. The annual awards are based on

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

3

the impressions of customer surveys, including on-line questionnaires, and interviews

covering more than 300 airlines.

SKYTRAX also compiles an Airline Star Ranking, which ranks airlines on a

scale of one to five. The evaluation of airline customer service views Thai Airways

cabin crew procedures.

Service quality criteria as follows:

• Assistance during boarding

• Welcoming passengers

• Applying safety procedures

• Food & beverage service efficiency

• Answering call bell

• Staff language skills

• Problem-solving ability

• Discipline among staff

• Enthusiasm of staff

• Sincerity of staff service

• Staff friendliness

• Courtesy of staff service

• Consistency of quality among staff

According to the SKYTRAX ranking. Thai Airways record of cabin crew

awards in 2017 is ranked no.4 for airline staff in Asia. This covers airline staff service

efficiency, friendliness, staff language skills and overall quality consistency.

(airlinequality.com) In addition, Thai Airways recorded three best awards of the

World’s best economy class onboard catering, the World’s best economy class, and the

World’s best airline lounge spa facilities (Thaiairways.com).

Related research by SKYTRAX (2017) stated that Thai Airways staff language

abilities in first class are above and beyond a basic level of service related dialogue.

SKYTRAX (2017) business class report and rating of Thai Airways staff language

dialogue related to meal service reported it could be completed with more consistency

by introducing different meal courses, checking if the customer has enjoyed their meal,

having some chat during service or asking if anything else is required. Address by

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

4

customer names is inconsistent; it is primarily offered during boarding time but this

does not tend to be followed up consistently during the flight. All of the feedback from

customer loyalty are remarkable through effective service recovery and problem

solving.

1.2 Research Questions

1.2.1 What communication problems are most common between Thai Airways

senior cabin crew and their foreign guests? 1.2.2 What communication strategies do Thai Airways senior cabin crew use

when facing communication problems?

1.3 Objectives of the Study

1.3.1 To investigate English communication problems between Thai Airways

senior cabin crew and their foreign guests.

1.3.2 To investigate communication strategies used by Thai Airways senior

cabin crew when facing the communication problems.

1.4 Significance of the Study

This study aims to investigate English communication problems and strategies

used by TG senior cabin crew on international flights with foreign guests. The findings

of this study will find ways to develop their English communication skills. Therefore,

the results may be beneficial to senior cabin crew who can handle problems when

communicating in English with foreign guests in an effectively professional manner.

Moreover, these investigations may be helpful for further providing guidelines

in English language training courses for senior cabin crew and gain Thai Airways

bringing back the nomination as number one for the Best Cabin Staff in Asia with the

reputational image of THAI touches to intentions as representatives of THAI.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

5

1.5 Scope of the Study

The scope is limited to investigating the communication in English language

between senior cabin crew of Thai Airways and their foreign guests in international

flights.

The study chose participants from Thai Airways senior cabin crew staff who are

responsible for new royal first class and new business class as a position ranking of

ASE, AHE, AP, and IM, and fly an intercontinental flight with a particular type of

aircraft: Airbus A380, Airbus A330 and Boeing 777.

The participants were randomly selected and the opinions of the participants

were surveyed by using a questionnaire at Thai Airways International Crew Center,

Suvarnabhumi Airport.

The participants in this study were 77 senior cabin crew of Thai Airways who

have been learning in a new business class course.

The findings from the survey may not be generalized to cabin crew that work in

economy class and other airlines. Also, time constraints were a limitation in this study.

The results were returned to the researcher by the due date during 20 March 2018 - 30

April 2018.

1.6 Definitions of Abbreviations and Terms

1.6.1 Definitions of abbreviations

CS/CSs =communication strategy/ communication strategies

L1 =first / native language or Thai

L2 =second / foreign language or English

L3 =The third language or other language

TG =Thai Airways International Public Company Limited

IM =Inflight manager

AP =Air purser

ASE =Senior air steward executive performs duties in Business class

and First class.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

6

AHE =Senior air hostess executive performs duties in Business class

and First class.

ICAO =International Civil Aviation Organization

CAAT =The Civil Aviation Authority of Thailand

1.6.2 Definitions of terms

Thai Airways International Public Company Limited (TG) refers to Thailand’s

national flag carrier which was founded in 1960. THAI now flies to 64 destinations in

33 countries. “The First Choice Carrier with Touches of THAI” is the company vision.

Senior Cabin crew refers to air stewards and air stewardesses who work with

many years of experience with Thai Airways and perform a duty with the operation of

new royal first class and new business class of intercontinental flights with a particular

type of aircraft and have been learning in new business class course as a position of In-

flight manager IM, Air purser AP, air steward ASE and air hostess AHE.

Service of THAI on board are passengers’ service during in-flight meals and

beverages service.

New Royal first/business classes service refers to Loyal Service Recovery

Process of Thai Airways and Yates partners who have the goal of service recovery. It

is a positive approach to complaint handling and builds guest loyalty service in new

royal first class and new business class.

Guest refers to first class and business class foreign passengers who are native

speakers and non-native speakers on board TG with the new royal first and new

business classes service.

Problems refers to English problems or difficulties that cabin crew encountered

with native speakers and non-native speakers of English.

Communication strategies (CSs) refers to both the interactional and

psycholinguistic strategies employed when Thai cabin crew who are English Second

Language Learners (L2) encounter a problem in communication, to achieve a

communicative goal.

International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) World-wide association

based in Montreal, Canada. It is an agency of the United Nations established to develop

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

7

the principles and techniques of international air navigation and foster the planning and

development of international air transport to ensure safety.

Aviation English language A specialized code based on the English universal

language for pilots, air traffic controllers and aircraft dispatchers who wish to operate

in any international aviation workplace which has set standards by ICAO.

1.7 Organization of the Study

“Problems of Thai Airways Senior Cabin Crew toward English Language

Communication with Guests in New Royal First Class and New Business Class on

International Flights” is presented in five chapters.

Chapter 1 introduces the background and rationale of the study, research

questions, objectives of the study, significance of the study, scope of the study,

definition of abbreviations and terms, and organization of the study.

Chapter 2 reviews the related literature containing five topics; communication,

the concept of cabin crew, barriers to effective communication, communication

strategies and research studies.

Chapter 3 provides the research methodology including information about the

participants, research instruments, data collection procedure and data analysis.

Chapter 4 describes the results of the analysis and the findings of the study in

relation to each research question, presented in both table and text format.

Chapter 5 presents the conclusion and gives recommendations for the further

study.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

8

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

This chapter reviews the literature about (1) communication, (2) the concept of cabin

crew (3) barrier to effective communication, (4) communication strategies, and (5)

related studies.

2.1 Communication

The word communication is derived from the Latin word “communis” which

means common. Communication as a word is clarified in the Penguin Dictionary of

Psychology (2009) as “The transmission of something from one location to another.

The ‘thing’ that is transmitted may be a message, a signal, a meaning, etc”. Weekley

(1967, p.338) pointed out that communication in Latin is communicare, which means

share and make common. Keyton (2011) mentioned that communication is a process of

transmitting the information from one person to another. The definitions of

communication are various based on each scholar’s perspective. According to

Hamilton (2014) “communication is the process of people sharing thoughts, ideas, and

feelings with each other in commonly understanding ways”. Hamilton (2014) described

the element concepts of the communication process on a basic model of

communication.

• The sender (encoder)

The source of message is someone who needs to communicate with others. In

completing this need, the sender transmits the message via a channel to the receiver(s).

• The receiver (decoder)

The interpreter of a message, which may or may not be an accurate message

different from the senders’ intention and the receiver may misinterpret the message.

• Stimulus and motivation

The sender must be stimulated to communicate, then the sender must motivate

to trigger and send a message.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

9

• Encoding and decoding

Encoding is the process of putting a message into a code. When the message is

received and interpreted by receiver, the process of extracting a message from a code

then occurs and is called decoding.

• Frame of reference

Frame of reference includes education background, race, cultural value, gender,

life experiences, attitude and personality of the communicator.

• Code

A set of symbols used to carry the message and can be divided into three basic

communication codes. (1) Expression of feelings or emotion through the spoken or

written of language or verbal code. Written messages might be information notes.

Verbal communication is the primary mode of communication in an aircraft. (2)

Paralanguage or vocal code involves the vocal elements that go along with the spoken

language such as tone of voice, pitch, rate, volume, and emphasis. (3) Nonverbal cues

or visual code involves all intentional and unintentional means other than written or

spoken word by which a person sends a message (Philpott, 1983).

• Channel

Channel is the medium through which messages pass. The channel acts as a

bridge connecting the source and the receiver. For spoken communication, this might

be face-to-face, or via interphone.

• Feedback

Feedback is reaction that is sent back to the source. It helps the sender to

evaluate the effectiveness of a message know whether the message was interpreted as

intended.

• Environment

The environment refers to the location where the communication take place

including time, physical and social surroundings.

• Noise

Noise is anything that interferes with communication by distorting or blocking

the message. External noise includes distractions within the environment such as a

phone’s ringing, engine’s starting, and people talking. Internal noise refers to conditions

of the receiver such as headache or jet lag.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

10

It is common knowledge that communication takes place when information is

transmitted from one or many sender to one or many receivers. In order to have

communication both the transmitter and the receiver must share a common code, so that

the meaning or information contained in the message may be (mis)interpreted.

2.2 The Concept of Cabin Crew

In airline industry, the English language is used as a major tool for controlling

transport operations. In these circumstances, the standard phraseology alphabet has

been set by International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to increase intelligibility

in order to ensure safety flight of airline. Aviation English language is based on a

specialized code used by cockpit crew and dispatcher, maintenance, ground and Air

Traffic Control (ATC) working in international civil aviation.

In the early mid 1990s it has been suggested that ‘crew’ consist of two separate

sub-groups or two distinctive groups represented by cockpit and cabin crew groups

(Chidester, 1993; Kayten, 1993; Chute & Wiener, 1995, 1996; Wiener & Kanki, 1993;

cited in Ford, Henderson & O’Hare, 2013). Clark (2012) explained that cabin crew

work separate from the cockpit crew, which refers to the pilots. Each area has different

responsibilities which can be viewed as two separate characteristic cultures in the

aircraft, thus cockpit crew are viewed as concerning flight operations control where

safety is stressed with the following procedures. In other words, cabin crew are divide

from cockpit crew in terms of two sociological and geographical environments

(Helmreich, Merritt, &Wilhelm, 1999). Chute &Wiener (1996) points out that cabin

crew have more space, and the personnel working in it are more physically active and

socially interactive than those on the flight deck. In addition, cabin crew are typically

part of the marketing department in customer relation service where passenger service

is emphasized (Metscher, Smith, & Alghamdi, 2009).

2.2.1 The Definitions of Cabin Crew

Famous English dictionaries and aviation authorities explained the word cabin

crew as follow; Macmillan English Dictionary (2011) defined the word as “the people

on a plane whose job is to look after the passengers”. English for Aviation Teaching

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

11

Notes explained the definition of cabin crew as “airline staff who work directly with

passengers and whose main job is to ensure their safety and well-being, in addition to

dealing with seating arrangements and food and drink service”. According to guidance

material for cabin crew training manuals (The Civil Aviation Authority of Thailand,

2016), cabin crew is defined as “a crew member who performs, in the interest of safety

of passengers, duties assigned by the operator or the pilot-in-command of the aircraft,

but who shall not act as a flight crew member”.

2.2.2 The Characteristics of Job Descriptions of Cabin Crew

A number of definitions clarify the meaning of the word and the characteristics

of job descriptions of cabin crew for an airline as responsible for the safety and comfort

of its passengers. Duties cabin crew during normal operations include:

1. Pre-boarding: Preflight cabin crew safety briefing include type questions relating

to service and emergency safety procedures.

2. Boarding: Assisting with passenger boarding.

2.1 In-flight services and safety

• Greeting, welcome and farewell

• Scanning for guests’ boarding pass, flight, name and seat number

• Address guest by name, introduce yourself

• Showing guests to their seats and providing special attention such as seat

orientation

• Assisting with outerwear and hand luggage

• Offering guests newspapers, magazines and in-flight entertainment

• Engaging in meals and taking drink orders: explaining choices to guests,

apologizing when preferable meal choice is not available

• Selling duty-free commercial goods and pursuing sales

• Checking the condition and provision of emergency equipment and information

for passengers such as to give briefings to passengers seated at emergency exits,

turn off any electronic devices or set to flight mode

• Demonstrating emergency equipment and safety procedures such as distribute

an infant life vest, an extension belt

• Administering first aid

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

12

• Producing written cabin reports after completing a flight

• To make public announcement

3. Pre take-off

4. Post take-off

5. Cruise

6. Approach and Landing

7. Disembarkation

8. Turnarounds

9. Dealing with emergencies situation

Admittedly, it is crucial that cabin crew are knowledgeable concerning aircraft

systems and basic components (Chute & Wiener, 1996). Consequently, cabin crew is

required to compete training courses covering safety procedures, customer service and

legal immigration issues which educate them on skills and recruitments. In order to

serve customers with high trust, security and comfort throughout a memorable flight

experience that will lead the airline business (Gomez, 2012).

2.3 Barriers to Effective Communication

English communication is essential to the aviation professional in today’s

world. The way of communicating shapes the image and creates an atmosphere with

good relationships. Some communication problems are existing between cabin crew

and passengers. Barkow and Rutenberg (2002) suggested that choosing messages that

are necessary, using short and simple sentences, avoiding air travel jargon, incomplete

wording, ambiguous wording, and non-essential messages could be reduce the risk of

misunderstanding. Wishom (2004) stated that poor grammar, pronunciation,

vocabulary, misinterpretation and cultural differences are affecting communication

(cited in Eamjoy, 2015). However, sometimes communicators send messages are not

clear, because the language barriers which are the most crucial are 1) word choice, 2)

denotative versus connotative meaning, 3) grammar, spelling, punctuation and sentence

structure (Krizan, Merrier, & Jones, 2002, Kositchart 2011). Other barriers existing that

may distort the meaning are physical barriers such as background noise, and cultural

language differences of dialects (Air Traffic control training series crew resource

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

13

management, 1998). Eisenberg (2010; cited in Lunenburg, 2010) states that

communication barriers can be divided into four types: process barriers, physical

barriers, semantic barriers, and psychosocial barriers.

Focusing on both barriers and solutions to communication from the cabin crew

perspective in standard operating procedures includes; phraseology, knowledge of

aircraft terminology, preflight briefings, and also an emphasis on the service attitude of

cabin crew who must conduct the most appropriate way to avoid giving offensive

messages or gestures that may cause frustration or misunderstanding (Thai Airways,

Hand in Hand, 2017). Moreover, the awareness of cultural differences with good

communication skills will reduce misunderstanding and impress passengers by

professional performance (Suthaceva, 2013).

2.4 Communication Strategies

Thai cabin crews are English Second Language Learners (L2). This research is

mainly focused on English communication problems that affect communication in the

workplace: productive skills; speaking and writing skills are conveyed messages from

sender to receiver, receptive skills: listening and reading skills are interpretive feedback

for clarification about message. These are viewed in terms of operation and seek to

determine what strategies are used to handle the communication problems, especially

in oral communication.

2.4.1 The Definitions of Communication Strategies (CSs)

Communication strategies (CSs) used by English Language Learners to handle

communication difficulties. Using English language is complicated and difficult for

Thai cabin crew who are English Second Language Learners (L2) due to the fact that

English is not their mother tongue or first language. It means that L2 learners select the

most appropriate strategies, whenever they encounter the problem, they might employ

strategies to understand its meaning (Swan 2008). Therefore, there have been many

definitions proposed for L2 learners, so that they can use appropriate communication

strategies (CSs) to achieve their potential communication. Below is a list of its different

definitions of various famous researchers.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

14

Selinker (1972) was one of the first influential researchers on interlanguage

during the 1970’s and suggested the notion of CS of L2 communication in his paper

“Interlanguage”. Then, the concept of CS was further developed and discussed by many

researchers.

Taron (1977, p. 195; cited in Kongsom, 2009) wrote that “conscious strategies

are used by an individual to overcome the crisis which occurs when language structures

are inadequate to convey the individual’s thoughts.” She introduced many categories

of CSs and five types of CSs: avoidance, paraphrase, conscious transfer, appeal for

assistance and mime were provided to adult English language learners.

Færch & Kasper (1983a, p. 36) found that “communication strategies (CSs) are

potentially conscious plans for solving what to an individually presents itself as a

problem in reaching a particular communicative goal”

Brown (1987, p.180) explained that “the conscious employment by verbal or

nonverbal mechanisms for communicating an idea when precise linguistic forms are

for some reasons not available to the learner at that point in communication”

Stern (1983, p.411) pointed out that “CSs is the techniques of coping with

difficulties in communicating in an imperfectly know second language”

Corder (1981, p.103; 1983, p.16) stated that “It is a systematic technique

employed by a speaker to express his or her own meaning when faced with some

difficulty”

Bialystok (1990, p.3) suggested that “the idea that strategies are used only

when a speaker perceives that there is a problem which may interrupt communication” According to Cohens’ strategies in learning and using a second language (2014,

p. 7), he defined communication strategies (CSs) in the following terms “Thoughts and

action, consciously chosen and operationalized by language learners, to assist them in

carrying out a multiplicity of tasks from the very onset of learning to the most advanced

levels of target-language performance”. The definitions focused on the idea that communication strategies (CSs) are

consciousness and it referred to the fact that speakers use a process of technique based

on interactional perspective between speaker and interlocutor to achieve

communication while, the concept of problematicity leads to problems-solving

strategies that a speaker uses when lacking morphological, lexical, or syntactic

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

15

knowledge emphasized on cognitive view. However, there has not been complete

agreement on a single definition of communication strategies (CSs).

2.4.2 The Taxonomies of Communication Strategies (CSs)

The taxonomies of CSs vary considerably in different studies. Cohen (2014)

classified communication strategies (CSs) into four subsets taxonomies which are (1)

retrieval strategies used by mnemonic word to memory (2) rehearsal strategies would

be form-focused practice by learning language structure (3) coping strategies (3.1)

compensatory strategies which compensate for lack of some language and create an

impression (3.2) cover strategies memorize only parts of phrases in an utterance (4)

communication strategies are used to deal with problems or breakdown of

communication while speaking by seeking clarification or confirmation, paraphrasing

words, using fillers (uh, uhm) when pausing while speaking and repeating words,

asking for help; viewed as verbal or nonverbal.

Many previous researchers such as Tarone (1981), Færch & Kasper (1983),

Bialystok (1990), Dörnyei & Scott (1997), and Nakatani (2005) have classified oral

communication strategies (CSs) into two main basic types which are reduction or

avoidance strategies used by low ability learners to avoid something during the process

of language communication and achievement or compensatory strategies considered

as good language learners’ behavior to complete an oral communication. Reduction or

avoidance strategies referring to learners’ attempts to do away with a problem are

reviewed as follows.

(1) topic avoidance or abandonment: learner is unable to continue and stops in

mid-utterance or is unfinished and leaving a essage because of the concept, which has

vocabulary or meanings that are difficult.

(2) message reduction: learner reduces the message from what was intended to

be communicated.

Achievement or compensatory strategies refer to learners choosing a way to

communicate and convey their message.

(1) circumlocution: learners describe the characteristics or elements of the

object or action instead of using the appropriate target language item or structure e.g.,

if a learner does not know the word key, he or she describes it by saying for example

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

16

“the thing use to open the door”, which exemplifies “the thing use to open the bottle”

for the word corkscrew.

(2) approximation: learners use an alternative lexical item that he or she knows

is incorrect, but shares enough semantic features to express the meaning as closely as

possible e.g., “pipe” for water pipe, “ship” for sail boat.

(3) use of all-purpose words: learners expand an empty lexical item to context

where certain words are lacking e.g., the overuse of word “thingy”.

(4) word coinage: learner creates a non-existing Second Language (L2) word

based on his or her knowledge of morphology rules e.g., “vegetarianist” for vegetarian,

“paintist” for painter, “liquid zoo” for aquarium, “airball” for balloon, (examples of

created words which are not stated in the dictionary).

(5) prefabricated patterns: useful phrases or sentences that are memorized for

survival purposes e.g., Where is the…?

(6) nonlinguistic signals: learners use non-linguistic resources such as mime,

gesture, facial expression or sound imitation to help in expressing the meaning.

(7) literal translation: learners translate a lexical item, an idiom, a compound

word, or structure from another language e.g., from their First Language (L1) to Second

Language (L2) “cat water” for seal “horse water” for seahorse.

(8) foreignizing: learners use First Language (L1) word by adjusting it to

Second Language (L2) phonologically (pronunciation) and/or morphology (suffix).

(9) code-switching: learners use two languages or multilingual within a sentence

or discourse, he or she uses a First Language (L1) word with First Language (L1)

pronunciation while speaking in Second Language (L2) or use a Third Language (L3)

word with Third Language (L3) pronunciation while speaking in Second language (L2).

(10) appeal for help: learners ask for help from the interlocutor either directly

by asking a question e.g., What do you call…? Or indirectly e.g., rising intonation,

pause, puzzled expression.

(11) stalling or time-consuming strategies: learners use filler or hesitation to fill

pauses and gain time to think e.g., well, you know, uh, uhm or longer phrases such as

it’s a good question (Dörnyei, 1995 adapted by Brown 2000).

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

17

Apart from these categories, Corder (1983) classified taxonomy of

communication strategies in two levels: high ability or risk-taking strategies and low

ability or risk-avoidance strategies. Description of each are presented in the following.

High ability or risk-taking strategies involves six strategies.

1. Social-affective strategies: the speakers are dealing with emotion or feeling,

enjoy companionship of others and maintain conversation to avoid silence

during interaction.

2. Fluency-oriented strategies: the speakers are concerned with speaking

fluently.

3. Accuracy-oriented strategies: the speakers are paying attention to accurate

grammar by self-correcting forms of their speech.

4. Non-verbal strategies: the speakers are using gestures and facial expression

such as eye contact.

5. Help-seeking strategies: the speaker turn to the interlocutor either directly

or indirectly. It might be include asking for confirmation, clarification, and

repetition to elicit help or rising intonation.

6. Circumlocution strategies: (paraphrase): the speaker is paraphrasing or

describing the elements of the objects involving exemplifying to show or

illustrate by action.

Low ability or risk-avoidance strategies involves three strategies

1. Message abandonment strategies: the speaker give up their attempt for

leaving the message unfinished.

2. Message reduction and alteration strategies: the speaker tries to avoid a

communication by reducing messages, simplifying their utterance, or

allows it by using new or familiar words that they can use confidently.

3. Time-gaining strategies: the speaker uses fillers to fill pause or gambits, to

gain time such as uh, uhm, well, or uses longer phrases such as it’s a good

question, as a matter of fact, this is difficult to explain, now let me see.

The taxonomy used in the study adopted the framework of communication

strategies (CSs) from Corder (1983), Dörnyei & Scott (1997), Nakatani (2005 & 2006),

and Cohen (2004) as they are classified in a similar way (cited in Chuanchaisit 2009).

The proposed CSs investigated in the questionnaire of this study were classified into

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

18

two categories involves nine strategies. Table 2.1 describes the framework of categories

of CSs used in this study.

Table 2.1 Taxonomy of CSs adopted in this study

1. High ability or risk-taking strategies

1.1 Social-affective strategies

1.2 Fluency-oriented strategies

1.3 Accuracy-oriented strategies

1.4 Non-verbal strategies

1.5 Help-seeking strategies

1.6 Circumlocution strategies

2. Low ability or risk-avoidance strategies

2.1 Message abandonment strategies

2.2 Message reduction and alteration strategies

2.3 Time-gaining strategies

Taking into account the aforementioned in table 2.1, for the purpose of this

study it will use both the interactional strategies (e.g. help-seeking strategies: ask

confirmation request, clarification check, and appeal for help) and psycholinguistic

consider lexical compensatory strategies (e.g. circumlocution and accuracy-oriented

strategies) used by learners of a second language (L2) when confronted with difficulties

of communication in the target language and, therefore, enhancing their ability to

communicate.

2.5 Problems in English Communication

In Thailand, there have been a number of studies investigating the problems in

English communication. These focus on oral and aural skills (speaking and listening)

used during interaction.

2.5.1 Productive skills problems “L2 learners are always having to compensate

for the limited vocabulary at their disposal” (Cook 1996) which may cause difficulty to

speak with correct accents. Bunthong, (2014) stated four factors (1) poor pronunciation

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

19

(2) speaking anxiety (3) lacking of grammatical and phonetics knowledge (4) limited

knowledge of English vocabulary cause speaking problems.

2.5.2 Receptive skills problems caused by pronunciation, is one of the most

common problems encountered by Thai Airways cabin crew (L2) who are unfamiliar

with the accents of native speakers and foreign passengers with regard to listening and

was the major problem especially Australian and Indian accents (Permtanjit, 2003;

Chenaksara, 2005). Moreover, lack of control of a speaker over the speed at which

speakers speak can fail to provide the important information, words, and signals

(Hamouda, 2013). In addition, the limitation of vocabulary depends on knowledge and

interpretation of listeners’ background also can cause listening problems (Underwood,

1989).

2.6 Related Studies

Regarding previous studies, English language and communication abilities play

a key role in international business. Suthaceva (2013) stated that to create effective

communication to impress passengers when providing service is important. Front line

staff and cabin crew are the most essential part of the service experience related to

passengers’ satisfaction and an airline’s success (Volkman, 2012). A number of

researches have been conducted to investigate the needs and problem of cabin crew.

Permtanjit (2003) analyzed cabin crew English problems and difficulties

concerning in-flight procedures in their jobs in Thai Airways during the basic course.

The participants were 105 Thai Airways cabin crew who had worked for a maximum

of one year. Questionnaires and semi-structured interviews were used. The results

revealed that lack of familiarity with accents and pronouncing specific consonants were

two major problems that THAI cabin crew mostly encountered. Secondly, speaking and

listening skills were the two most important language skills for Thai cabin crews. Also,

knowledge of job-related vocabulary and cultural differences were essential for

enhanced effectiveness of English. Finally, it was shown that English language training

courses should use polite language and in-flight vocabulary as a supplement to the core

handbook. The result of this research was limited to only Thai Airways cabin crews

who had worked for a maximum of one year experience.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

20

Chenaksara (2005) conducted a study on needs analysis for English

communication skills of Thai Airways International cabin crew trained in a general

conversation course, pronunciation course, public address course, service on board,

safety procedure course, and others. Most of the cabin crew were female aged over 30

years old with more than 7 years’ experience as participants in this survey. The data

was collected from 330 cabin crews by questionnaire. The result revealed that cabin

crew at 18.5% took English courses besides those given by the company and the reason

was to communicate fluently, to enhance English skills, to be promoted to higher

positions, respectively. English communication skills of listening and speaking of Thai

Airways cabin crew in intercontinental flights during the period in November-

December 2004 found that listening was the major problem especially in Australian

and Indian accents, the speaking problem was lack of vocabulary in terms of updated

news, cooking terms, customs formality, and cultural differences. Moreover, she

recommends that some interesting aspects for further studies of the English

communication skills of front line staff functions such as cockpit crew, check-in staff,

ticketing staff, and reservation staff etc. and English communication courses on non-

working routines should be undertaken.

Another related research by Tangniam (2006) is Thai Airways ground staff

performing their jobs duties leading to greater passenger services satisfaction; they are

also one part of the department to fulfill the airline business. It might conclude that in

their routine, they need to interact with passengers in many aspects concerning services.

Tangniam (2006) investigated the English language needs of Thai Airways ground

staff. The participants consisted of 218 ground staff from three functions: KP (Airport

Customer Services), LP (Special Services), and LL (Baggage Services). The majority

of participants were females and the age was ranged between 30-39 years. Most of them

have graduated with a bachelor’s degree and have been working as ground staff for 7-

14 years. The study showed that all ground staff perceived that the English language

was essential and agree 100% unanimously. They assessed their English proficiency as

fair in all four skills: listening, speaking, reading and writing. For this study, they

viewed listening as “mostly difficult” and ranked down speaking, writing and reading

skills. Listening skills for various accents and idiomatic use was “extremely need”.

Need of speaking for explaining the reason in case of flight irregularities or being

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

21

denied a seat on an overbooked flight when mistakes occur were advised as “extremely

needed”. Importantly, they needed to learn how to speak polite language in refusing,

requesting, clarifying or confirming messages, expressing empathy, offering assistance

and giving directions. Moreover, using appropriate Aviation English for telephone

conversations in order to avoid miscommunication in terms of the Aviation alphabet

provided by International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) including consonant and

vowel sounds, intonations and word stress, are needed to communicate effectively

through a public announcement system. Reading the Passenger Handling Manuals

(PHM) and Ground Operation Manuals (GOM) were viewed as something they might

learn by their experience or from senior staff about job procedures. Writing skills

including conducting telexes correctly to aviation format was the only one of the writing

skills viewed as “mostly difficult”.

In addition, the research analysis of communicative competence of Canale and

Swain (1980) identify four dimensions. Firstly, grammatical competence refers to

grammatical and lexical capacity. Secondly, Sociolinguistic competence refers to social

context in which communication take place, including relationship and purpose of their

interaction. Thirdly, discourse competence refers to the interpretation of individual

message element. Fourthly, strategic competence refers to strategies that

communicators manipulate to communicate. Considering results in the appropriate

English language, there are needs to develop ESP (English for Specific Purposes)

courses for staff in performing their jobs.

Anantawan (2010) examined the communication problems between Thai and

foreign cabin crew of Thai Airways International. This study sought to find out the

relationships between participants’ English exposure experience and English

communication problems as well as aimed to figure out the relationship between

participants’ work experience and English communication problems. The

communication problems were categorized into cultural problems, accent problems,

production problems and receptive problems. The participants of the study were 24

Thai cabin crew and 12 foreign cabin crew of Thai Airways International including

Chinese, Taiwanese, Japanese and Korean representing the whole population of over

four thousand Thai cabin crew and around three hundred foreign cabin crew. A

questionnaire was used to collect data using random sampling technique. The result of

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

22

this research show that there was no relationship between English exposure experience

and four types of communication problems. Both participants who have had English

exposure experience and those who have not had any have a “low” degree of problems

in cultural problems, production problems and receptive problems. However, the

degree of accent problems was “high” in the range of more than 5-10 years and more

than 15 years except those who have had experience in staying with an English native

speaker family, whose degree of accent problems was “low” level.

Tontanavetchakul (2011) investigated the intercultural communication of Thai

cabin crew working in international airlines. A self-administered online questionnaire

by Google Docs was used as a data collecting instrument during December 2010 to

January 2011. The subjects were 60 Thai female cabin crew working with 5 major

foreign airlines; Asiana Airlines, China Airlines, Emirates Airline, EVA Air, and JAL

Ways that employ Thai cabin crew where English is not the primary language. The

results identified barriers to effective intercultural communication in four factors which

are cultural biases, language differences, nonverbal misinterpretation, and high anxiety

and stress. The study found that language differences and difficulties were the most

common problem especially accents and pronunciation. Moreover, the participants

recommended training courses should be provided about local language, cultures, and

etiquette of nationalities.

Kositchart (2011) investigated Thai AFS exchange students’ problems and

needs in English listening and speaking proficiency in the United States of America.

The objective was to examine what types of conversation English language problems

that Thai exchange students experienced most during their stays in the United States

between 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 academic years, and to explore types of resources

that exchange students used as a tool and strategies for solving or overcoming

conversation difficulties. Two hundred Thai AFS students were the population of this

study. The participants were 57 Thai AFS exchange high school students who

participated in the AFS Program in the United States of America between 2008-2009

and 2009-2010 for a one year program staying with American host families. The total

sample was two hundred participants, one hundred participants from each year. Online

questionnaires were used as the instrument to collect the data from 200 respondents via

e-mail. The results showed that the AFS participants encountered a range of English

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

23

difficulties especially unfamiliar words, and unable to comprehend jokes, metaphors or

puns when communicating with native English speakers. Moreover, when having

difficulty comprehending conversation, the participants solve problems with using a

talking-dictionary, listened to the detail and form of words together in context.

Wisawajareonkit (2015) studied English communication problems among Thai

employees and investigated an English training course to improve English

communication skills of Thai employees in a Japanese trading company in Sathorn area.

The population was 120 divided into three groups: 21 sales staff, 70 sales coordinator

staff, and 29 administrative staff. A questionnaire was used to collect data using

purposive sampling which aimed to study a particular segment of the population. The

results of this research show that mostly sale staff do not have problems in English

communication skills and they would like to take a speaking English course to improve

their communication with customers. For sales coordinator staff, they prefer to take a

course in listening, speaking for telephone conversation course and writing for sending

e-mail. Administrative staff do not use English with customers; thus, they focus only

on productive skills which are speaking and writing. The most common problem was

English speaking skill. The two main problems with the highest mean score in English

were “unable to understand accents and unable to understand rapid speech”

Chuanchaisit (2009) studied of types of communication strategies (CSs) used

by lower-ability students and pedagogical implications of helping lower abilities

student to improve their oral communication abilities through the selection of effective

communication strategies (CSs). The population was 300 third-year English major

students enrolled in the speaking course in the Faculty of Humanities in the second

semester of the year 2008 at the University of the Thai Chamber of Commerce (UTCC).

The participants were 100 students who were categorized into two groups based on the

average grades of their previous English courses. The objectives of the strategies used

a Speaking Task Inventory (SUSTI) and the Oral Communication Test (OCT) to assess

their communication strategies (CSs) use. The results found that the high ability

students tend to use risk-taking strategies, whereas the low ability students used time-

gaining strategies or risk-avoidance depending upon limited knowledge, which seemed

to be an obstruction to their use of communication strategies (CSs). The study suggested

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

24

that students should be taught both linguistic knowledge and communication strategies

(CSs) to promote their effective language learning.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

25

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

This chapter provides the methodology about (1) population and sample, (2) research

instruments, (3) data collection procedure and (4) data analysis.

3.1 Population and Sample

The study investigated 77 participants who are working in TG company as a

senior cabin crew under QV department using English for communication; all are native

Thai speakers and at the level of English proficiency with the minimum requirement of

the TOEIC (Test of English for International Communication) score at 550. The sample

population was limited to TG senior cabin crew categorized as the cabin crew who were

required for these particular new services which includes working position ranking of

IM, AP, ASE and AHE. A questionnaire was used to collect data using purposive

sampling aimed to study a particular segment of a population. The participants are

flying on the particular aircraft type of Airbus A380, Airbus A330, Boeing 777 working

in only new first class and new business class on international routes, which are long-

haul flights such as flights to London, Frankfurt, and Paris.

3.2 Research Instruments

In this study, the research instrument to collect the data was the questionnaires

which were written in both Thai and English. The questionnaire was composed of

closed-ended and open-ended questions. The participants were asked about

demographic data, their problems with English use in terms of oral communication and

the strategies they used when they are facing problems during conversation with foreign

guests. The closed-ended questionnaire was adapted from: “How Competently Do You

Communicate?” L.B. Rosenfeld and R.M. Berko, Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman, Little,

Brown (www.faa.gov), Wisawajareonkit (2015) and Chuanchaisit (2009), focusing on

these parts as follows.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

26

Part I: Demographic Data

In this part, general and educational background aims at ages, gender, education,

field of study, current position, standardized test of TOEIC, TOEFL, IELTS score, and

years of experiences of TG cabin crew were designed in the form of closed-ended

questions.

Part II: Barriers of English Communication

This section was concerned with their English ability while communicating with

their foreign guests. The questionnaires were adapted from: “How Competently Do

You Communicate?” L.B. Rosenfeld and R.M. Berko, Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman,

Little, Brown and Wisawajareonkit (2015) focusing on the problems that caused

communication barriers in terms of listening and consisted of 10 closed-ended items

and speaking consisted of 10 closed-ended items. A Five-Point Likert Scale was used

to measure the frequency and levels of the problems and were presented with the

following criteria in table 3.1.

Table 3.1 Interpretation of Scores Results in Communication Barriers

Rating Interpretation

1 Never

2 Rarely

3 Sometimes

4 Often

5 Always

Part III: Communication strategies

In this section, the questionnaires were adopted from the study done by

Chuanchaisit (2009) according to the taxonomy’s framework of communication

strategies (CSs) from Corder (1983), Dörnyei & Scott (1997), Nakatani (2005 & 2006),

and Cohen (2004). The participants were asked to rate their problems and the strategies

they used to overcome the problems consisting of 15 closed-ended items based on a

five-point Likert scale. The criteria were classified in table 3.2.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

27

Table 3.2 Interpretation of Rating Results in Communication Strategies

Rating Interpretation

1 Never

2 Rarely

3 Sometimes

4 Often

5 Always

Part IV: Open-ended question for TG crew to give suggestions

In this final section, an open-ended question was added to provide an

opportunity for the participants to express their ideas in in-depth responses.

3.3 Data Collection Procedure

The participants were randomly selected. The convenience sampling technique

was used for participant selection and the data was collected by hand and via the crew

mailbox.

The researcher asked for permission from the QV department and was allowed

to conduct this research study. A total of 80 questionnaires were distributed to

participants, 79 questionnaires were returned and there were 77 questionnaires that

could be analyzed in this study. These were completed and returned to the researcher’s

mail box at Thai Airways International’s Crew Center, Suvarnabhumi Airport during

20 March-30April, 2018.

3.4 Data Analysis

The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences Program (SPSS) version23

analyze the quantitative data. The results of the questionnaire were categorized,

interpreted, and tabulated on computer sheets.

(a) The data concerning the general and educational background (part I) was

presented as frequency and percentages.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

28

(b) Mean and standard deviations were computed to determine the types of

problems in English listening and speaking skills (part II) and the participants’

strategies regarding using English for communication on the performance of cabin crew

in their English language (part III).

The mean score (x) was used to interpret the level of communication problems

based on the criteria of Rensis Likert (1932) as shown in table3.3.

Table 3.3 Interpretation of A Five-Likert Scale

Scale Problem / Strategies Mean Range

5

4

3

2

1

Always (81-100%)

Often (51-80%)

Sometimes (21-50%)

Rarely (1-20%)

Never (0%)

4.50-5.00

3.50-4.49

2.50-3.49

1.50-2.49

1.00-1.49

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

29

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS

This chapter reports the results of research problems and strategies employed by Thai

Airways senior cabin crew. The results were calculated statistically and presented in

three parts as follows:

Part I: The data, derived from personal data concerning gender, age, educational

background, work experiences, rank position, and English proficiency were presented

as frequency and percentages.

Part II: Types of problems in English listening and speaking skills based on a

five-point Likert scale was used to score the participants’ level of communication

barriers of English communication.

Part III: Shows the mean score (x) of the communication strategies used to solve

problems between Thai Airways senior cabin crew and their guests during oral English

communication.

Part IV: Presents the results of the open-ended questions.

4.1 Demographic Data of the Participants

In this part, the descriptive analysis data which includes gender, age,

educational background, work experiences, rank position, and English proficiency were

obtained from questionnaires. The data was presented in tables in the form of frequency

and percentage.

Table 4.1 Gender

Gender Frequency Percentage

Male 30 38.96

Female 47 61.04

Total 77 100

Demographic Data of the Participants (n=77)

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

30

As illustrated in Table 4.1, the frequency and percentage of TG senior cabin

crew in the sample shows that the most of the participants were female at 61.04% and

38.96% were male.

Table 4.2 Age

Age(Years) Frequency Percentage

21-25 0 0

26-30 0 0

31-35 2 2.60

36-40 17 22.08

41-45 22 28.57

46-60 36 46.75

Total 77 100

Demographic Data of the Participants (n=77)

As can be seen in table 4.2, the results show that 46.75% in the age range of 46-

60 years accounted for the largest group. A total of 28.57% were between 41-45 years

and 22.08% were between 36-40 years, while 2.60% of participants were aged between

31-35.

Table 4.3 Educational Background

Educational Background Frequency Percentage

Bachelor’s Degree 56 72.73

Master’s Degree 21 27.27

Doctorate Degree 0 0

Others 0 0

Total 77 100

Demographic Data of the Participants (n=77)

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

31

Table 4.3 presents the frequency and percentage of educational background.

The results indicate that the participants who graduated with a bachelor’s degree at

72.73% were the majority.

Table 4.4 Work Experience

Working Experience (Years) Frequency Percentage

6-10 years 1 1.30

11-15 years 16 20.78

16-20 years 17 22.08

21-25 years 25 32.47

More than 25 years 18 23.38

Total 77 100

Demographic Data of the Participants (n=77)

Table 4.4 shows in terms of work experience of Thai senior cabin crew with

Thai Airways, most of the participants had work experience between 21-25 years of

experience at 32.47%, more than 25 years of experience at 23.38% followed by 16-20

years of experience at 22.08%, and 11-15 years of experience at 20.78%, while 6-10

years of experience was only 1.30%.

Table 4.5 Rank Position

Rank Position Frequency Percentage

IM 4 5.19

AP 8 10.39

ASE 25 32.47

AHE 40 51.95

Total 77 100

Demographic Data of the Participants (n=77)

Table 4.5 displays the frequency and percentage of rank position. The results

indicate that most of the senior cabin crew at 51.95% are working as a rank position of

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

32

AHE, follow by rank position of ASE at 32.47%, rank position of AP at 10.39%, and

rank position of IM at 5.19%, respectively.

Table 4.6 Standardized English Proficiency Test

TOEIC Score Frequency Percentage

555-650 11 16.2

655-750 24 35.3

755-850 22 32.3

855-990 11 16.2

Total 68 100

Demographic Data of the Participants (n=68), 9 participants no data.

As indicated by the data in Table 4.6, most of the participants had TOEIC scores

ranging among 655-750 at 35.30% and 755-850 at 32.30%, was rated (x=762.94).

4.2 Participants’ Communication Barriers

Table 4.7 Experience of Unsuccessful Communication Using English with Foreign

Guests

Experience of Unsuccessful

Communication Frequency Percentage

Yes 66 85.71

No 11 14.29

Total 77 100

Demographic Data of the Participants (n=77)

As can be seen in table 4.7, the frequency and percentage of the participants

who experienced the communication problems with foreign guests is shown. The

results show that the majority of 85.71% of the participants have encountered

communication problems, while 14.29% of them have not.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

33

Table 4.8 Frequency of Encountering Communication Problems with Guests

Frequency of Problem Occurrence Frequency Percentage

Every flight 1 1.30

Most of the time 2 2.60

Sometimes 50 64.94

Rarely 13 16.88

No experience of problem occurrence 11 14.29

Total 77 100

In Table 4.8, the results are displayed in the range of the period of time in which

the participants have had the experience of encountering communication problems with

guests. The findings show that the biggest group of 64.94% of the participants had

experienced problems sometimes. While 14.29% have had no experience encountering

communication problems with guests.

The questionnaire contained twenty questions focusing on ten questions of

listening and ten questions of speaking problems. Seventy-seven participants answered

the questions in this part (n=77). The results are shown in the following tables in the

form of descriptive statistical data including percentage, mean (x ), and standard

deviation.

Table 4.9 Listening and Speaking Problems Listening

Problems

5

Always

(%)

4

Often

(%)

3

Sometimes

(%)

2

Rarely

(%)

1

Never

(%)

𝐱

S.D. Level of

Frequency

1. I am able to

understand

perfectly all

different English

accents.

1

1.30%

43

55.84%

30

38.96%

3.

3.90%

0 3.54 0.59 Often

(Table continued)

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

34

Listening

Problems

5

Always

(%)

4

Often

(%)

3

Sometimes

(%)

2

Rarely

(%)

1

Never

(%)

𝐱

S.D.

Level of

Frequency

2. I am able to

understand slang,

idiomatic

expressions, or

colloquialisms.

2

2.60%

19

24.68%

47

61.04%

9

11.69%

0 3.18 0.66 Sometimes

3. I am able to

remember the

entire

information.

4

5.19% 34

44.16% 36

46.75% 3

3.90% 0 3.51 0.66 Often

4. I am able to

understand a

speaker’s main

idea.

22

28.57%

49

63.64%

5

6.49%

1

1.30%

0 4.19 0.60 Often

5. I am able to

understand

technical terms.

4

5.19%

30

38.96%

36

46.75%

6

7.79%

1

1.30%

3.39 0.76 Sometimes

6. I pay attention

to the intonation.

22

28.57% 42

54.55% 11

14.29% 2

2.60% 0 4.09 0.72 Often

7. I pay attention

to the

pronunciation.

27

35.06% 41

53.25% 8

10.39% 1

1.30% 0 4.22 0.68 Often

8. I pay attention

to words which

the speaker

emphasizes

33

42.86%

39

50.65%

4

5.19%

1

1.30%

0 4.35 0.64 Often

9. I pay attention

to the speaker’s

eye contact,

facial expression

and gestures

45

58.44%

31

40.26%

1

1.30%

0 0 4.57 0.52 Always

10. I anticipate

what the speaker

is going to say

based on the

context.

17

22.08%

47

61.04%

13

16.88%

0 0 4.05 0.62 Often

(Table continued)

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

35

Speaking

Problems

5

Always

(%)

4

Often

(%)

3

Sometimes

(%)

2

Rarely

(%)

1

Never

(%)

𝐱

S.D.

Level of

Frequency

11. I speak

naturally and

effectively.

10

12.99%

50

64.94%

17

22.08%

0 0 3.91 0.58 Often

12. I speak

appropriate words

(avoid jargon or

slang).

20

25.97%

38

49.35%

17

22.08%

2

2.60%

0 3.99 0.76 Often

13. I speak

appropriate

pronunciation.

8

10.39%

43

55.84%

25

32.47%

1

1.30%

0 3.75 0.65 Often

14. I speak with

correct grammar

tenses.

11

14.29%

29

37.66%

33

42.86%

4

5.19%

0 3.61 0.79 Often

15. I speak with

correct words

order.

9

11.69%

37

48.05%

29

37.66%

2

2.60%

0 3.69 0.71 Often

16. I speak

without anxiety.

13

16.88%

46

59.74%

18

23.38%

0 0 3.94 0.63 Often

17. I speak in a

warm tone.

33

42.86%

40

51.95%

3

3.90%

1

1.30%

0 4.36 0.62 Often

18. I speak at a

rate that is neither

too fast or too

slow (take a

breath between

sentences).

17

22.08%

40

51.95%

20

25.97%

0 0 3.96 0.69 Often

19. I speak

fluently (avoiding

“uh”, “uhm”, “you

know”, awkward

pauses, etc).

4

5.19%

29

37.66%

43

55.84%

1

1.30%

0 3.47 0.62 Sometimes

20. I am able to

express complex

ideas.

2

2.60%

21

27.27%

45

58.44%

7

9.09%

2

2.60%

3.18 0.73 Sometimes

Table 4.9 presents the oral communication as rated by the participants when

communicating in English with foreign guests. Overall, most participants when

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

36

listening pay attention to the speaker’s eye contact, facial expression and gestures rated

at the “always” level of frequency (x =4.57) followed by speaking in a warm tone (x

=4.36).

For the other two problems, the participants had difficulties speaking. The

results of the speaking problems showed that the participants had problems to express

complex ideas (x =3.18) and the participants had difficulties to understand slang,

idiomatic expressions, or colloquialisms which was rated ( x =3.18) for listening

problem with results the same.

4.3 Communication Strategies

The last part presents communication strategies used by the participants when

encountering communication problems with foreign guests. The questionnaire

contained 15 questions as follows.

Risk-Taking strategies

Social affective strategies used in items no.1,9,15

Accuracy-oriented strategies used in items no.10,11

Non-verbal strategies used in items no.2,13

Help-seeking strategies used in items no.3,5,6

Circumlocution strategies used in item no.14

Risk-Avoidance strategies

Message abandonment strategies used in items no.7,8

Message reduction strategies used in items no.4

Time-gaining strategies used in items no.12

The data obtained from questionnaires were then analysed and rearranged

according to the ranking of the mean (x) using descriptive statistical procedures

including percentage, mean (x), and standard deviation (S.D).

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

37

Table 4.10 The Use of English Communication Strategies Communication

Strategies 5

Always (%)

4 Often (%)

3 Sometimes

(%)

2 Rarely

(%)

1 Never (%)

𝐱

S.D.

Level of Frequency

1 4. I use the words which are familiar to me. (Message-reduction strategies)

39 50.65%

34 44.16%

4 5.19%

0 0 4.45 .597 Often

2 5. I ask for repetition when a message is not clear to me; such as “could you say it again?” “Pardon?” (Help-seeking strategies)

34 44.16%

36 46.75%

7 9.09%

0 0 4.35 .644 Often

3 3. When the message is not clear, I ask participants for clarification directly. (Help-seeking strategies)

27 35.06%

47 61.04%

3 3.90%

0 0 4.31 .544 Often

4 15. I give a good impression to the listener. (Social-affective strategies)

31 40.26%

38 49.35%

8 10.39%

0 0 4.30 .650 Often

5 2. I use eye contact (always face to guest, relaxed facial expression). (Non-verbal strategies)

29 37.66%

40 51.95%

8 10.39%

0 0 4.27 .641 Often

6 10. I correct myself when I notice that I have made a mistake. (Accuracy-oriented strategies)

25 32.47%

43 55.84%

9 11.69%

0 0 4.21 .635 Often

7 9. I encourage myself to use English even though it may risk making mistakes. (Social-affective strategies)

16 20.78%

45 58.44%

12 15.58%

4 5.19%

0 3.95 .759 Often

(Table continued)

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

38

Communication Strategies

5 Always

(%)

4 Often (%)

3 Sometimes

(%)

2 Rarely

(%)

1 Never (%)

𝐱

S.D.

Level of Frequency

8 1. I try to enjoy the conversation. (Social-affective strategies)

12 15.58%

46 59.74%

18 23.38%

1 1.30%

0 3.90 .661 Often

9 13. I use gestures if I cannot express myself. (Non-verbal strategies)

20 25.97%

26 33.77%

29 37.66%

1 1.30%

1 1.30%

3.82 .884 Often

10 14. I describe the characteristics of the object instead of using the exact word that I am not sure of. (Circumlocution strategies)

14 18.18%

36 46.75%

24 31.17%

3 3.90%

0 3.79 .784 Often

11 6. I try to elicit help from my interlocutor indirectly; such as rising intonation. (Help-seeking strategies)

14 18.18%

35 45.45%

25 32.47%

2 2.60%

1 1.30%

3.77 .826 Often

12 12. I use some fillers to fill pauses or phrases; like “actually” “well” “it is difficult to explain” in order to gain more time to think about what I should speak. (Time-gaining strategies)

11 14.29%

24 31.17%

36 46.75%

6 7.79%

0 3.52 .837 Often

13 11. I think of what I want to say in Thai, then construct the English sentence. (Accuracy-oriented strategies)

3 3.90%

21 27.27%

35 45.45%

12 15.58%

6 7.79%

3.04 .952 Sometimes

(Table continued)

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

39

Communication Strategies

5 Always

(%)

4 Often (%)

3 Sometimes

(%)

2 Rarely

(%)

1 Never (%)

𝐱

S.D.

Level of Frequency

14 7. I give up expressing a message if I cannot make myself understood. (Message-abandonment strategies)

1 1.30%

5 6.49%

33 42.86%

30 38.96%

8 10.39%

2.49 .821 Rarely

15 8. If I face some language difficulties, I will leave a message unfinished. (Message-abandonment)

1 1.30%

0 20 25.97%

28 36.36%

28 36.36%

1.94 .864 Rarely

As indicated by the data in table 4.10, the ranking of use of CSs is at very high

use (x= 4.45) to low use (x= 1.94). The five most reported CSs used were message-

reduction strategy (x= 4.45), followed by help-seeking strategy (x= 4.43), help-seeking

strategy (x= 4.31), social-affective strategy (x= 4.30) and non-verbal strategy (x= 4.27).

The least five CSs reported were message abandonment strategy (x= 1.94), followed

by message abandonment strategy (x= 2.49), accuracy-oriented strategy (x= 3.04),

time-gaining strategy (x= 3.52) and help-seeking strategy (x= 3.77).

Item no. 4 shows that message reduction is the highest (x =4.45), the majority

of participants at 50.65% always used the words which are familiar to them when they

faced problems.

Considering Item no. 5, the participants at 46.75% often asked for repetition

when the message is not clear.

Item no. 3 shows that the highest percentage of the participants at 61.04% often

asked the interlocutor for clarification directly.

Item no.15, which was under social-affective strategies, reported in the fourth

rank, shows that 49.35% of the participants often give a good impression to the listener.

Moreover, the participants believed that whilst communicating across different

cultures, non-verbal strategies were regarded as the most important as seen in Item no.

2, which was the use of eye contact at 51.95% of the participants.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

40

Item no. 10 shows that 55.84% of the participants often correct themselves when

noticing that they have made a mistake under accuracy-oriented strategy.

Item no. 9 shows that 58.44% of the participants often encouraged themselves

to use English even though it may risk making mistakes.

Item no. 1 shows that 59.74% of the participants often tried to enjoy the

conversation under social-affective strategies, and 37.66% of the participants used

gestures to express themselves sometimes according to Item no. 13.

Item no.14 shows that 46.75 % of the participants often employed an indirect

way of speaking to enhance their communication or described the characteristics of the

object instead of using the exact words that they were not sure of and none of them ever

use the circumlocution strategy.

Item no. 6 shows that only 1.30% of the participants never try to elicit help from

the interlocutor indirectly such as using a rising intonation, while 45.45% of the

participants often use this technique under help-seeking strategy.

In terms of risk-avoidance strategies, it was found that the participants

sometimes used some fillers to fill pauses or phrases, using expressions like “uhm” “er”

“well”. There were 46.75% of the participants who used time-gaining strategies when

they cannot think of that what they should speak.

Whereas for the message abandonment strategies, which were Item no. 7 the

majority of the participants at 42.86% sometimes give up expressing a message if they

cannot make themselves understood and Item no. 8. has the lowest (x =1.94) at only

1.30% of the participants who always left a message unfinished.

4.4 Comments and Suggestions

The open-ended questions asked for the participants’ suggestions about the use

of communication strategies (CSs) and their English communication problems whilst

the participants were communicating with their foreign guests.

From the findings, the participants suggested that help-seeking strategy, such as

seeking assistance from interlocutors whenever an inflight communication problem

between a passenger and a flight attendant arose by asking for repetition when a

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

41

message is not clear, trying to understand their jokes and guessing the message are the

most helpful strategies when communicating with foreigners.

In addition, the participants suggested trying to improve English knowledge and

keep practicing for developing the skills to proficiency was the social-affective strategy

that was considered as the most useful strategy to develop their English oral

communication.

Moreover, the participants suggested that TOEIC score is not a factor to

determine whether they can speak English language fluently. Knowledge in a variety

of aspects of viewpoints could be applied to communicate with foreigners in various

professional careers. It may imply that the participants used problem solving technique

communication in terms of resources from frame of reference which includes

knowledge from education background, race, cultural value, gender, life experiences,

attitude and personality. The participants also indicated that because of the different

varieties of accents of passengers on board, they use their experiences and use familiar

words under message-reduction strategies to achieve his or her goal to run through the

communication.

The findings of this study will be summarized and discussed in the next chapter.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

42

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION, DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents (1) a summary of the study, (2) a summary of the finding, (3)

discussion of the results, (4) the conclusion, and (5) gives recommendations for the

further study.

5.1 Summary of the Study

This section summarizes the objectives, participants, instruments and procedure

used in the study.

5.1.1 Objectives of the study

1. To investigate English communication problems between Thai Airways senior cabin crew and their foreign guests.

2. To investigate communication strategies used by Thai Airways senior cabin

crew when facing communication problems.

5.1.2 Participants, instruments, and procedures

The participants of this study were 77 Thai Airways senior cabin crew,

comprising 47 females and 30 males.

The instrument used for data collection in this study was a questionnaire

consisting of three parts of closed-ended questions and one part of open-ended question.

A five-point Likert scale was used to score: demography, types of problems in English

listening and speaking skills, level of barriers of English communication, the strategies

used to solve problems between participants and their foreign guests during oral English

communication, and participants’ suggestions.

The researcher asked for permission from the QV department and was allowed

to conduct this research study. A total of 80 questionnaires were distributed and

returned to the researcher’s mail box at Thai Airways International Crew Center,

Suvarnabhumi Airport during 20 March-30April, 2018. Data was analyzed by using the

Statistical Package for the Social Sciences program (SPSS). The findings are presented

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

43

by frequency, percentage, mean, and standard deviation. The last part is the suggestions

from participants and is presented in descriptive form.

5.2 Summary of the Findings

The results of the study can be summarized as follows:

5.2.1 Demography of the participants

The participants of this study were 77 Thai Airways senior cabin crew, both

male and female. The results showed that the most of the participants were female at

61.04%, whereas 38.96% of the participants were male. In addition, the largest age

group of the participants was in the range of 46-60 years old at 46.75%. In terms of

educational background, the participants who graduated with a bachelor’s degree

72.73% were the majority. Moreover, for work experience, most of the participants had

worked between 21-25 years at 32.47%, while only 1.30% of the participants had

worked between 6-10 years. As the rank position, there were 51.95% at the position of

AHE. The total of the participants who had TOEIC scores was 68 (n=68)

(mean=762.94).

5.2.2 Participants’ Communication Problems

The participants were asked to rate their problems in listening and speaking

skills when communicating with foreign guests.

5.2.2.1 In terms of experience of unsuccessful communicating using

English with foreign guests, most of the participants have encountered communication

problems at 85.71%. The biggest group of 75.75% of the participants had experienced

problems which occurred sometimes while 14.29% of them have not.

5.2.2.2 Listening skills: The results showed that the majority of the

participants at 61.04% had problems with being able to understand slang, idiomatic

expressions, or colloquialisms ( x =3.18), which occur sometimes was the most

significant problem.

The participants also sometimes had difficulties with being able to understand

the technical terms (x =3.39).

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

44

On the contrary, the majority of participants 55.84% are often able to understand

perfectly all different English accents (x =3.54). In addition, the participants often have

no problems with remembering the entire information ( x =3.51). Moreover, the

participants often have no problems with being able to understand a speaker’s main idea

(x =4.19).

Focused on the behavior of the participants whilst listening with foreign guests,

the study revealed that the participants always pay attention to the speaker’s eye contact,

facial expression and gesture (x =4.57) was the most popular reported.

5.2.2.3 Speaking skills: The results indicated that the problems in speaking

were at 58.44%. The majority of participants had difficulties about expressing complex

ideas (x =3.18). However, the participants often speak in a warm tone (x =4.36).

Moreover, the participants speak without anxiety (x =3.94) at a rate that is neither too

fast or too slow (x =3.96), and used appropriate words avoiding jargon or slang (x

=3.99) with natural and effective speech (x =3.91).

5.2.3 Participants’ Communication Strategies

Fifteen communication strategies were listed in the questionnaire adapted from

the study done by Chuanchaisit (2009) according to the taxonomy’s framework of

communication strategies (CSs) from Corder (1983), Dörnyei & Scott (1997), Nakatani

(2005 & 2006), and Cohen (2004). The results of the communication strategy ranking

found that the participants’ preference of Communication Strategies at very high use

(x=4.45) to low use (x =1.94).

The most popular Message- reduction strategies reported were the participants

use the words which are familiar to them was the most used strategies (x =4.45). The

second rank was Help-seeking strategies; the participants also asked for repetition when

a message is not clear (x =4.35), followed by asking to interlocutors for clarification

directly for Help-seeking strategies (x =4.31).

In addition, social-affective strategies reported in the fourth rank. It shows that

the participants often give a good impression to the listener (x=4.30).

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

45

Furthermore, It can be seen that the participants believed that whilst

communicating across different cultures non-verbal strategies were regarded as

important by using eye contact (x=4.27).

In terms of risk-avoidance strategies as the least three used strategies, it was

found that the participants sometimes used time-gaining strategies to fill pauses or

phrases using expressions like “uhm” “er” “well” when they cannot think of what they

should speak (=x3.52). While message abandonment strategies were the lowest (x

=1.94) only 1.30% left messages unfinished and rarely give up expressing a message if

the participants cannot make themselves understood (x=2.49).

5.2.4 Participants’ suggestion in the open-ended question

According to the open-ended question asking for the participants’ comments

and suggestions, it was revealed that when they face problems in English

communication, they use various CSs such as help-seeking strategies, social-affective

strategies, and message-reduction strategies to solve their communication problems. In

addition to the CSs techniques or tools, some of the participants also pointed out that

knowledge background from several sources and experience could be applied to

problems solving to more effectively communicate.

5.3 Discussion

This section concern the discussion of the significant results related to the

theories and relevant research.

5.3.1 Participants’ Communication Problem: Listening Skill

The results showed that Thai Airways senior cabin crew sometimes having

difficulties to understand slang, idiomatic expressions, or colloquialisms was the most

significant problem in listening skills. Also, participant D commented in part IV that

“trying to understand their jokes and guess the meaning is the most difficult situation

when communicating with foreigners” The results of the study related to Kositchart

(2011) who investigated Thai AFS exchange students’ problems and needs in English

listening and speaking proficiency in the United States of America and found that the

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

46

unfamiliar words and being unable to comprehend jokes, metaphors or puns were the

problems of Thai AFS exchange students. Moreover, the results of the current study

partially supported Wishom (2004), who stated that vocabulary, misinterpretation and

cultural differences are affecting communication.

5.3.2 Participants’ Communication Problem: Speaking Skill

Regarding the speaking problems of Thai Airways senior cabin crew, the results

showed that being able to express complex ideas was the most significant problem.

These results supported the theories of Corder (1983), which state that sometimes L2

learners may not able to express messages which they wish to convey to interact with

interlocutors successfully. The results also indicated that Thai Airways senior cabin

crew always use nonlinguistic signal resources such as mime, gestures, eye contact, and

facial expression to help in expressing the meaning to communicate and convey their

message as an effective tool to communicate with non-native English speakers. This

supported Philpott (1983), who found that nonverbal cues or visual codes such as pay

attention to the speaker’s eye contact, facial expression and gestures supplants the

spoken word. This could explain why people tend to believe more on what they see

than what they hear.

In relation to non-verbal strategies while speaking, the results supported the

communication competence theory of Canale and Swaine (1980; cited in Tangniam,

2006), who claimed that the use and the function of verbal and non-verbal

communication strategies (strategic competence) can enhance communicative

competence where necessary and enable learners to overcome difficulties when L2

communication breakdowns occur.

5.3.3 Participants’ Communication Strategies

The results showed that Thai Airways senior cabin crew always used the words

which are familiar to them when they are faced with problems was the highest mean

score of the message reduction strategies. This indicated that they had used risk-

avoidance strategies to overcome their English oral communication problems although

there seems to be some disagreement as to the characteristics of avoidance behavior in

language learners.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

47

The message reduction strategies is reported often used and at highest mean on

the questionnaire responses by Thai Airways senior cabin crew who tended to continue

the flow of the conversation and used new or familiar words rather than used message

abandonment strategies such as give up expressing a message or left message

unfinished if they cannot make themselves understood.

Help-seeking strategies has been ranked in second and third, indicating that

Thai Airways senior cabin crew use repetition and clarification techniques to request

the explanation of the unfamiliar words and confirm the message in order to make

themselves clearly understood.

On the other hand, the lowest ranked reported was message abandonment

strategies. It seems that Thai Airways senior cabin crew rarely give up expressing a

message or left a message unfinished.

5.4 Conclusion

5.4.1 This study revealed that the two major problems of oral communication

were being able to understand slang, idiomatic expressions, or colloquialisms and being

able to express complex ideas whether they communicated with native or non-native

English speaker guests.

5.4.2 The results indicated that Thai Airways senior cabin crew often speak in

a warm tone and aim to pay attention to the interlocutor by using non-verbal language

such as eye contact, and facial expression while communicating.

5.4.3 The results showed that problems occurred sometimes. When Thai

Airways’ senior cabin crew had problems in oral communication the most significant

communication strategy used by Thai Airways senior cabin crew was to use the

communication strategy of message-reduction and using the words which are familiar

to them for the assurance many foreign guests look for. On the other hand, they rarely

used the communication strategy of message abandonment.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

48

5.5 Recommendations for Further Study

Based on the results and conclusion of this study, this study involved a very

small number of participants in one setting over a limited time period and dealt with

only one side of Thai Airway senior cabin crew. Therefore, any attempts to generalize

from these data can only be tentative.

Further study should be conducted on both side of interlocutors and could be

done to examine various groups by a test, then classify them as levels of high and low

proficiency groups to find out whether there is any relationship between the

employment of different strategies and participants' levels of language proficiency. So

that the result would be more generalized, it is possible that further study is needed to

investigate the use of message reduction strategies which has been identified as an

avoidance strategy or to convey a message with interlocutors successfully.

This study focused on problems and strategies of English communication by

using quantitative data, interviews are recommended for further studies.

However, it is hoped that features of the data presented in this study may

resonate with other researcher in different contexts to develop effective communication

in depth.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

49

REFERENCES

Anantawan, N. (2010). The study of communication problems between Thai and

foreign flight attendants of Thai Airways International. (Unpublished master’s

research paper, Thammasat University, Bangkok)..

Bialystok, E. (1990). Communication Strategies: A Psychological Analysis of Second

Language Use. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Brown, H. D. (1987). Principles of language learning and teaching. NY: Prentice

Hall. Englewood Cliffs.

Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching. New York:

Pearson Education.

Bunthong, P. (2014). Problems in English Listening and Speaking Skills of Thai

Teacher when Communicating with Foreign Team Teacher: A case

study of Thai Team Teacher at Fun Language International (Thailand).

(Unpublished master’s research paper, Thammasat University, Bangkok).

Cabin crew. (2011). In Macmillan English Dictionary International Student Edition

for Advanced Learner. Oxford: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.

Canale, M., and Swaine, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches

to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.

Chenaksara, P. (2005). Need analysis of English communication skills of Thai

Airways International cabin crew (Master’s thesis, Kasetsart University,

Bangkok).

Chuanchaisit, S. (2009). The effects of English language ability and types of

communication strategies on oral communication ability of Thai university

students. (Doctorate’s thesis, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok).

Chuanchaisit, S., and Prapphal, K. (2009). A study of English communication

strategies of Thai university students. Manusya: Journal of Humanities,

Special Issue 17, 100-216.

Coder, S. P. (1981). Error analysis and interlanguage. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

Cohen, D. A. (2014). Strategies in learning and using a second language. London:

Longman.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

50

Communis. (2009). In The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology. Arthur S. Reber,

Rhianon Allen, Emily Sarah Reber. London: Penguin.

Cook, V. J. (1996). Second language learning and second language teaching (2nd

edition). London: Arnold.

Dörnyei, Z., and Scott M. L. (1997). Communication strategies in a second language:

Definitions and taxonomies. Language Learning, 47(1), 173-210.

Eamjoy, A., and Sappapun, P. (2006) A study of needs and barriers in English

communication skills of Thai secretaries at the women secretaries and

administrative professional association of Thailand (WSAT). The 5th LITU

International Graduate Conference.

Eisenberg, E. M. (2010). Organization communication: Balancing creativity and

constraint. New York: Saint Martin’s.

Ellis, S. and Lansford, L. (2014). English for Cabin Crew Express Series. Oxford:

Oxfords University Press.

Færch, C. and Kasper, G. (1983). Strategies in interlanguage communication. London:

Longman.

Hamilton, C. (2014). Communicating for results: A guide for business and the

professions (10th ed.). Canada: Wadsworth.

Keyton, J. (2011). Communication and organization culture: A key to understanding

work experience. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Kongsom, T. (2009). The effects of teaching communication strategies to Thai

learners in English. (PhD Thesis). University Southampton

Kositchart, N. (2010). A study of Thai AFS exchange students’ problem and needs in

English listening and speaking proficiency in the United States of America.

(Unpublished master’s research paper, Thammasat University, Bangkok).

Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of

Psychology, 140, 1-55.

Lunenberg, F. C. (2010). Communication: The process, Barriers, and Improving

Effectiveness. Schooling, 1(1), 1-11.

Nakatani, Y. (2005). The effect of awareness-raising training on oral communication

strategies use. Modern Language Journal, 89 (16), 76-91.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

51

Nakatani, Y. (2006). Developing an oral communication strategy inventory. Modern

Language Journal, 90, 152-167.

Nanakorn, S. (2011). Intercultural Communication Competence among Thai Airways

Cabin Crew. (Unpublished master’s research paper, Thammasat University,

Bangkok).

Perntanjit, G. (2003). An analysis of Thai Airways International flight attendants’

language problems to provide practical suggestion for language training

(Master’s thesis, Mahidol University, Bangkok).

Philpott, J. S. (1983). The relative contribution to meaning of verbal and nonverbal

channels of communication: A meta-analysis. (Unpublished master’s thesis,

University of Nebraska, Nebraska).

Reber, S. A., Allen, R. and Reber, S. E. (2009). Penguin Dictionary of Psychology.

London: Penguin.

Selinker, L. (1972). “Interlanguage”, International Review of Applied Linguistics,

10(3), 209-231.

Stern, H. H. (1983). Fundamental concepts of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Suthaceva, S. (2013). Communication Problems between Non-Thai Passengers and

Thai Cabin Crew. Unpublished master’s research paper, Thammasat

University, Bangkok).

Swan, M. (2008). Talking Sense about Learning Strategies. RELC Journal, 39,

262-273.

Tangniam, T. (2006). An analysis of English language needs for Thai Airways ground

staff (Master’s thesis, Kasetsart University, Bangkok).

Tarone, E. (1977). Conscious Communication Strategies in Interlanguage: A Progress

Report, in Brown, H. Douglas, Yorio, Carlos A. And Crymes, Ruth H.

(Eds.). On TESOL’77 teaching and learning English as a second language’ Trends in resource and practice, 194-201.

Tarone, E. (1981). Some thoughts on the notion of communication strategy. TESOL

Quarterly, 15(3), 285-295.

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

52

Thai Airways. (2017). Hand in Hand Text, Thai Airways International, Bangkok.

Tontanavetchakul, Y. (2011). Barrier to effective communication of Thai cabin crew

working in international airlines where English is not the primary language.

(Unpublished master’s research paper, Thammasat University, Bangkok).

Underwood, M. (1986). Teaching Listening. New York: Longman.

Weekley, E. (1967). An etymological dictionary of modern English (Vol.1). New

York: Dover Publications.

Wisawajareonkit, C. (2015). A study of English communication problems among Thai

employees in a Japanese trading company. (Unpublished master’s research

paper, Thammasat University, Bangkok).

Wishom, L. (2004). Relationship communication: Understanding Communication

Barriers. Houston.

Online Sources

Air Traffic control training series crew resource management, (1998). Retrieved from:

https://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/virtual_disk_library/index.cgi/821003/FID17

7/pubs/af/atc/at-m-06a/at-m-06a.pdf

Barkow, B. & Rutenberg, U. (2002). Improving the Effectiveness of Aircraft Cabin

Safety Briefings. Transportation Development Centre Transport Canada.

Retrieved from:

https://www.bteam.com/reports/Aircraft_safety_briefings_TP%2013973E.pdf.

Chute, R. D, & Wiener, E. L. (1995). Cockpit /cabin communication: I. A tale of two

cultures. Retrieved from: http://raes-hfg.com/reports/10apr02-

Hijacking/10apr02-2cultures.pdf

Clark, Barbara L. (2012). Safety Talk and Service Culture Flight Attendant Discourse

in Commercial Aviation. Retrieved from:

http://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/jspui/handle/123456789/8382.

English for Aviation Express Series Teaching Notes. Oxford University Press.

Retrieved from:

https://elt.oup.com/elt/students/express/pdf/exp_00_aa_units_1-8.pdf

Ford, J., Henderson, R. and O’Hare, D. (2013). Barriers to Intra-Aircraft

Communication and safety: The Perspective of the Flight Attendants. The

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

53

International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 23(4), 368-387. Retrieved from:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264815537_Flight_attendant_and_pi

lot_perceptions_of_in-flight_events

Gomez, G. Guillermo (2012). The Art of Customer Service Onboard~My Thesis. Pass

Christian University. Retrieved from: https://linkedin.com.

Hamouda, A. (2013). An investigation of Listening Comprehension Problems

Encountered by Saudi Students in the EL Listening Classroom. International

Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development,

2(2). Retrieved from: http://www.hrmars.com/admin/pics/1882.pdf

Helmreich, R., Merritt, A., &Wilhelm, J. (1999). The Evolution of Crew Resource

Management Training in Commercial Aviation. Retrieved from:

http://www.narcap.org/Associated_Research_docs/Pub235.pdf

Metscher, D. S., Smith, M., & Alghamdi, A. (2009). Multi-Cultural Factors in the Crew

Resource Management Environment: Promoting Aviation Safety for Airline

Operations. Journal of Aviation/Aerospace Education & Research, 18(2).

Retrieved from: https://commons.erau.edu/jaaer/vol18/iss2/6.

Rifkind, L. (2005). Human Factors Guide for Aviation Maintenance Chapter 13:

Communication. Federal Aviation Administration. Retrieved from:

https://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/maintenance_hf/library/documents/medi

a/human_factors_maintenance/human_factors_guide_for_aviation_maintenan

ce_-_chapter_13.communication.pdf.

Skytrax (2017). The review of Thai Airways. Retrieved from:

https://skytraxratings.com/airlines/thai-airways-rating

Thai Airways. Retrieved from:

https://www.thaiairways.com/en_KR/about_thai/company_profile/history.pag

e

The Civil Aviation Authority of Thailand. Retrieved from: https://www.caat.or.th/wp-

content/uploads/2017/06/GM_CCTPM-CAAT-Rev-2_2017.pdf

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

APPENDIX

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

55

APPENDIX

QUESTIONNAIRE This questionnaire is a part of a research paper submitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirement for a Master Degree of Arts in English for Career, Language

Institute, Thammasat University. Your response will be confidential and used for

academic purpose only. Your cooperation in completing this questionnaire will be

highly appreciated.

Part I: Personal Data / ขอมลสวนตว

1. Gender / เพศ

___ Male ชาย ___ Female หญง

2. Age / อาย ____20-25 ___31-35 ___41-45

____26-30 ___36-40 ___46-60

3. Educational background / ประวตการศกษา

___Bachelor’s Degree / ปรญญาตร ___ Doctorate Degree / ปรญญาเอก

___Master’s Degree / ปรญญาโท ___ Others / อ2น ๆ

4. How long have you been working at Thai Airways Company Limited? /

ระยะเวลาการทางานกบ บรษท การบนไทย จากด (มหาชน)

___1-5 years / ป ___16-20 years / ป

___6-10 years / ป ___21-25 years / ป

___11-15years / ป ___More than 25 years ป

5. Rank Position / ตาแหนงงาน

___IM ___AP ___ASF ___AHF

___ASE ___AHE ___ASR ___AHR

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

56

6. Standardized English Proficiency Test คะแนนผลสอบวดระดบความรทาง

ภาษาองกฤษตามมาตรฐาน ____ TOEIC ____THAI-TEP

____ TOEFL ____TU-GET

____ IELTS ____CU-TEP ____Others

please specify score: ______ points. โปรดระบผลคะแนน

Part II: Barriers of English Communication / อปสรรคในการส5อสารภาษาองกฤษ

1. Have you had any experience of unsuccessful communication using English with

foreign guests? (Both native English speakers and non-native English speakers) /

ทานเคยประสบปญหาการสN อสารไมบรรลผลกบลกคาตางชาตหรอไม? (ชาวตางชาตทN ใชภาษาองกฤษเปน

ภาษาแมและไมใชภาษาองกฤษเปนภาษาแม)

___Yes / เคย

___No / ไมเคย

If yes, how often do the problems occur?

___Every flight / ทกเท2ยวบน

___Most of the times / โดยสวนมาก

___Sometimes / บางครD ง

___Rarely / แทบจะไมเคย

The following are the problems that caused communication barrier in terms of

listening.

Please check (Ö) in front of the item you choose.

5=Always สม2าเสมอ

4=Often สวนใหญ

3=Sometimes บางครD ง

2=Rarely นาน ๆ ครD ง

1=Never ไมเคย

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

57

Listening Problem

Always 5

Often 4

Sometimes 3

Rarely 2

Never 1

1.I am able to understand perfectly all different English accents. /ฉนสามารถเขาใจทกสาเนยงของภาษาองกฤษ

2.I am able to understand slang, idiomatic expressions, or colloquialisms. / ฉนสามารถเขาใจสแลงหรอสานวนภาษาองกฤษได

3.I am able to remember the entire information. / ฉนสามารถจาขอมลทDงหมดได

4.I am able to understand a speaker’s main idea. / ฉนสามารถเขาใจจบใจความสาคญของผพด

5.I am able to understand technical terms. /ฉนสามารถเขาใจศพทเทคนค

6.I pay attention to the intonation. / ฉนใหความสนใจโทนเสยง

7.I pay attention to the pronunciation. / ฉนใหความสนใจในการออกเสยง

8.I pay attention to words which the speaker emphasizes. / ฉนใหความสนใจคาท2ผพดเนน

9.I pay attention to the speaker’s eye contact, facial expression and gestures. / ฉนใหความสนใจในทาทางสหนาแววตาของผ

พด

10.I anticipate what the speaker is going to say based on the context. / ฉนคาดหมายวาผพดจะพดอะไรโดยขDนอยกบ

บรบท

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

58

Speaking Problem

Always 5

Often 4

Sometimes 3

Rarely 2

Never 1

11.I speak naturally and effectively. / ฉนพดตามธรรมชาตและมประสทธผล

12.I speak appropriate words (avoid jargon or slang). / ฉนพดคาท2เหมาะสมหลกเล2ยงการใชคาสแลงหรอคาเฉพาะ

13.I speak appropriate pronunciation. / ฉนพดออกเสยงไดอยางเหมาะสม

14.I speak with correct grammar tenses such as “I went to the airport yesterday.” / ฉนพดถกตองตามหลกไวยากรณในรปแบบโครงสรางเวลา เชน “I went to the airport yesterday.”

15.I speak with correct words order. / ฉนพดถกตองตามการเรยงลาดบตาแหนงคา

16.I speak without anxiety. / ฉนพดโดยปราศจากความวตกกงวล

17.I speak in a warm tone. / ฉนพดในโทนนDาเสยงสภาพ

18.I speak at a rate that is neither too fast or too slow (take a breath between sentences) / ฉนพดในอตราจงหวะท2เหมาะสมไมชาหรอ

เรว

19.I speak fluently (avoiding “uh,” “uhm” “you know,” awkward pauses, etc) / ฉนพดอยางคลองแคลวล2นไหล โดยไมมการตดขดในคาพด เออ อม you know เปนตน

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

59

20.I am able to express complex ideas. / ฉนสามารถพดแสดงความคดท2ซบซอน

Part III: Communication Strategies The following are communication strategies to solve communication problems. Please put a Ö in front of the item you choose. 5=Always สม2าเสมอ 4=Often สวนใหญ 3=Sometimes บางครD ง 2=Rarely นาน ๆ ครD ง 1=Never ไมเคย Communication Strategies Always

5 Often

4 Sometimes

3 Rarely

2 Never

1 1.I try to enjoy the conversation. / ฉนรสกสนกกบการสนทนา

2.I use eye contact (always face to guest, relaxed facial expression). / ฉนสบตาคสนทนาระหวางพดและผอนคลายสหนาแววตา

3.When the message is not clear, I ask my participants for clarification directly. / เม2อขอความท2ส2อสารไมชดเจน ฉนถามคสนทนาเพ2อความกระจางในทนท

4.I use the words which are familiar to me. / ฉนใชคาศพทและสานวนท2ฉนคนเคย

5.I ask for repetition when a message is not clear to me; such as “could you say it again?” “Pardon?”/ ฉนขอคสนทนาทวนคาพดซD าอกครD ง เม2อขอความสนทนาไมชดเจน

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

60

6.I try to elicit help from my interlocutor indirectly; such as rising intonation. / ฉนขอความชวยเหลอจากคสนทนาใน

ทางออม เม2อการส2อสารไมชดเจน เชน การออกเสยงสงทายประโยค

7.I give up expressing a message if I cannot make myself understood. / ฉนลมเลกความตDงใจในการอธบายขอความ หากฉนไมสามารถเขาใจเปน

ภาษาองกฤษไดกอน

8.If I face some language difficulties, I will leave a message unfinished. / ถาหากฉนเผชญกบความยากลาบากทางภาษา ฉนจะจบการสนทนาทนท ซ2 งอาจจะพดไมจบประโยค

9.I encourage myself to use English even though it may risk making mistakes. / ฉนพยายามใชภาษาองกฤษ ถงแมวาจะเส2ยงกบการพดผดกตาม

10.I correct myself when I notice that I have made a mistake. / ฉนพยายามแกไขคาท2ผด เม2อฉนรตววาพดผด

11.I think of what I want to say in Thai, then construct the English sentence. / ฉนคดในส2งท2อยากจะพดเปนภาษาไทย แลวเปล2ยนเปนภาษาองกฤษในประโยคสนทนา

12.I use some fillers to fill pauses or phrases; like “actually” “well” “it is difficult to explain” in order to gain more time to think about what I should speak. / ฉนใชคาเตมแตงบทสนทนาหรอใชสานวน เม2อไมรวาจะพดอะไร หรอ เพ2มเวลาในส2งท2ฉนตองการจะพด

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

61

Part IV: Suggestion Please answer these questions by using your own opinion.

1. Suggestion โปรดใหคาแนะนา _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Thank you for your time and cooperation.

13.I use gestures if I cannot express myself. / ฉนใชทาทางประกอบการพดหากฉนอธบายไมถก

14.I describe the characteristics of the object instead of using the exact word that I am not sure of. / ฉนอธบายลกษณะของส2งท2ตองการจะพด

ถง แทนท2จะใชคาศพทท2เฉพาะเจาะจง เม2อฉนไมแนใจในคาศพทนDน

15.I give a good impression to the listener. / ฉนพยายามสรางความประทบใจท2ดตอผฟง

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS

62

BIOGRAPHY Name Miss Naruechon Pupphavesa

Date of Birth February 19, 1973

Educational Attainment

1992-1995: Bachelor of Laws, Thammasat

University, Bangkok, Thailand

2016-2017: Master of Arts (CEIC), Thammasat

University, Bangkok, Thailand

Work Position Cabin Crew

Thai Airways International Public Company

Limited

Scholarship 1989-1990: Thai-American Student Exchange

Program (TASE)

Work Experiences 1998-2018: Cabin Crew

Thai Airways International Public Company

Limited

1996-1997: Ground Staff

Thai Airways International Public Company

Limited

Ref. code: 25605921040175HYS